Verizon Doesn't Like The Idea Of Open Internet” – Appeals FCC Net Neutrality Decision

[czerdrill]

Ummm.... Doesn't almost any app do just that?

I mean, there are IM clients that piggy back on your data plan and allow you to text and use SMS services which bypass their texting plan and services?

Are there not apps like Skype out there, that would allow someone to sign up for a data plan but choose the cheapest minute plan, and then use the data plan to make unlimited phone voice calls to anywhere in the world? Something that VZW would charge a lot more money for if someone wanted unlimited calling and an international plan?

What about apps that let you stream video, like YouTube, Netflix and Hulu, while VZW has their own VCast streaming services that they charge for?

The problem with your argument is that what you propose shouldn't or won't happen, already has in many areas. It just hasn't happened to this one area yet; Tethering.

There are plenty of apps out there that provide free services that let you bypass the ones that VZW offers and charges for, and they can all require using or "piggybacking" on VZW's data plan and network in order to function.

Wait so these apps can operate without VZW's data plan? Like I said, the most that will happen is VZW will be forced to unblock the apps. Their bottom line is not going to be affected at all. They will still charge for tethering, people will still pay and they will still throttle. You're acting as if this ruling reverses the unblocking of tethering apps, that suddenly everyone is going to start using PDANet to tether. You fail to realize that people are paying to tether on verizon, and they will continue to pay.

As for the examples you gave, all of them require you to have a data plan from Verizon. As much as you think you're pulling one over on them, you're not...at all. Sending free text messages, how does that affect VZW? By your own admission, texts cost them nothing right? And as mentioned, they can just raise prices and bundle texting with a data plan and force you to pay. Skype, the one offered by Verizon only works over 3G, so you're still paying Verizon. The one offered by Skype itself, works over wifi, but again, you still have a smartphone with a data and voice plan, and you're still paying Verizon every month. You're acting as if people are going over on their minutes every month and Skype has freed them from this burden. Wrong. The actuality is people are paying for minutes they don't use, and texts they don't use. Verizon is not affected if you use Skype over wifi, because they're still getting paid regardless.

As for tethering, I know you like arguing for the sake of arguing, but the differences between Skype, Hulu and Netflix and tethering should be quite evident. If not, then there is no point in this discussion (although I doubt there was a point to begin with).

 

[ABQNM]

Understood, but they could still have data caps on the tethering under the current data plan.

It's all moot for me anyway I guess. When I occasionally need to tether for some reason, I will and I am not paying for it and there is not much they can do about it. When you use less than 1GB a month on an Unlimited plan, it isn't like my account is going to pop up in that top 5% bracket and cause them to question my usage...

That is exactly how I use it. I use it periodically on the go or if Comcast dies but all together I have maybe used 15gb in 3 years doing that. I agree they could choose to cap only the dun apn but I doubt that will happen since it is easier for them to just redirect connections using the dun apn completely since that is easier and their policy. I primarily use wifi do even if I were to tether I would be like you and be nowhere near the top 5% let alone the top 50%. I know people who have used 100gb in a month. That is what they are trying to stop. If you use 100gb a month, spring for the extra $.

Sent from my brain using human to phone transport technology.

 

[bigkhan]

People keep refering to the contract, what about people who are not under a contract? Say you payed full price for your device to avoid being locked in to a contract. Does verizon make people sign some type of terms of service or something?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using DroidForums

 

[czerdrill]

Understood, but they could still have data caps on the tethering under the current data plan.

It's all moot for me anyway I guess. When I occasionally need to tether for some reason, I will and I am not paying for it and there is not much they can do about it. When you use less than 1GB a month on an Unlimited plan, it isn't like my account is going to pop up in that top 5% bracket and cause them to question my usage...

Well yeah, you can void your warranty, do the RadioComm or whatever its called edit to enable tethering again on phones with GB or better, just so you can send an email when you're at a hotel somewhere. But, VZW will find a way to block that too eventually. People have this bizarre misconception that Android devs can do everything and cannot be stopped, but the truth is they can be and will be. At that point, it'll be more whining.

BTW, a quick Google search will show that the "data is data" and "unlimited means unlimited" crowd have been saying the same whiny things verbatim since 2007 and probably earlier. It is what it is. This ruling isn't going to change anything.

 

[czerdrill]

People keep refering to the contract, what about people who are not under a contract? Say you payed full price for your device to avoid being locked in to a contract. Does verizon make people sign some type of terms of service or something?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using DroidForums

Yes. You still are bound by the TOS regardless if you're off contract or not.

 

[SquireSCA]

As for the examples you gave, all of them require you to have a data plan from Verizon. As much as you think you're pulling one over on them, you're not...at all.

How so? They all require you to have a data plan from VZW. So does free tethering.

Sending free text messages, how does that affect VZW? By your own admission, texts cost them nothing right?

Correct, it costs them nothing, until people start dropping their $20 unlimited text plans and use the free texting apps on the data plan that they are already paying for, or for all the people that pay a per-text plan, when VZW sees the revenue from that drop 20% in a year and trending downward, they take notice.

And as mentioned, they can just raise prices and bundle texting with a data plan and force you to pay.

The mere fact that they are going to start doing that, says that the free apps are cutting into their profits and they are going to have to start forcing people to pay for services that they obviously don't want or need in order to keep raking in the cash. So is it possible that your first comment about not pulling one over on them is inaccurate? Obviously, free apps using existing data plans that allow one to not have to pay VZW for additional services is an issue for them in areas other than tethering.

Skype, the one offered by Verizon only works over 3G, so you're still paying Verizon. The one offered by Skype itself, works over wifi, but again, you still have a smartphone with a data and voice plan, and you're still paying Verizon every month.

Are there not Google Voice and other apps that do the same thing? There are apps that let you have a basic low minute plan, but use the data plan for essentially unlimited phone calls. So the precident is there to have to allow people to use third party apps that circumvent VZW's paid services.

You're acting as if people are going over on their minutes every month and Skype has freed them from this burden. Wrong. The actuality is people are paying for minutes they don't use, and texts they don't use. Verizon is not affected if you use Skype over wifi, because they're still getting paid regardless.

I know several people personally, that have the cheapest minute plans and use thousands of "minutes" per month over their data plan. They may not be using all of their 450 minutes that they paid for, but they are getting thousands of minutes of calling each month that they are NOT paying for. So people are getting the use of a high minute plan while only paying for the lowest plan. How is that different than tethering, where I get to tether for free on a data plan that I paid for that I don't use all my alloted bandwidth on? And I don't mean what the difference is in semantics, what is the difference really, in the real world? I am getting something that I am "not paying for" according to VZW's definitions....

 

[ABQNM]

People keep refering to the contract, what about people who are not under a contract? Say you payed full price for your device to avoid being locked in to a contract. Does verizon make people sign some type of terms of service or something?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using DroidForums

http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/...GREEMENT&jspName=footer/customerAgreement.jsp

This applies to anybody using their network, contract or not. Just like your credit card agreement. By using it you have to abide by the rules. The important part is points d and e in their rights to limit service paragraph. Point d is iffy since it is legal to root your device but not to circumvent network protection or steal service, which they are classifying tethering under. It also falls under e because it can impact other users because of the amount of bandwidth used by tethering is much more than you could use in the device alone. /facts

I just think that if you need to tether that much, own up and pay for it. If you use it on occasion and still use under 5gb for the month, no harm done. /opinion

Sent from my brain using human to phone transport technology.

 

[SquireSCA]

Well yeah, you can void your warranty, do the RadioComm or whatever its called edit to enable tethering again on phones with GB or better, just so you can send an email when you're at a hotel somewhere. But, VZW will find a way to block that too eventually. People have this bizarre misconception that Android devs can do everything and cannot be stopped, but the truth is they can be and will be. At that point, it'll be more whining.

BTW, a quick Google search will show that the "data is data" and "unlimited means unlimited" crowd have been saying the same whiny things verbatim since 2007 and probably earlier. It is what it is. This ruling isn't going to change anything.

I remember them saying the same thing about landline phones, cable TV, ISP's, etc...

Things did change, and it will change here too at some point...

 

[SquireSCA]

Customer Agreement

This applies to anybody using their network, contract or not. Just like your credit card agreement. By using it you have to abide by the rules. The important part is points d and e in their rights to limit service paragraph. Point d is iffy since it is legal to root your device but not to circumvent network protection or steal service, which they are classifying tethering under. It also falls under e because it can impact other users because of the amount of bandwidth used by tethering is much more than you could use in the device alone. /facts

I just think that if you need to tether that much, own up and pay for it. If you use it on occasion and still use under 5gb for the month, no harm done. /opinion

Sent from my brain using human to phone transport technology.

I think that if we "used it a lot", most of us would pay for it. It's the occasional usage and the fact that I am typically under 1gb a month on an unlimited plan, and that usage includes the occasional tethering, that I don't feel like paying an extra $240 a year for.

If I tethered a lot, they would see that excess bandwidth and simply charge me for going over, or bump me up to the next teir and I would not argue with them.

I have never argued that unlimited means that I should have as much bandwidth as I want. I have only argued that if I pay for unlimited(5GB), and only use 20% or less of that each month, I don't want to pay twice because 2% of that 20% was on my laptop...

 

[ABQNM]

How so? They all require you to have a data plan from VZW. So does free tethering.



Correct, it costs them nothing, until people start dropping their $20 unlimited text plans and use the free texting apps on the data plan that they are already paying for, or for all the people that pay a per-text plan, when VZW sees the revenue from that drop 20% in a year and trending downward, they take notice.



The mere fact that they are going to start doing that, says that the free apps are cutting into their profits and they are going to have to start forcing people to pay for services that they obviously don't want or need in order to keep raking in the cash. So is it possible that your first comment about not pulling one over on them is inaccurate? Obviously, free apps using existing data plans that allow one to not have to pay VZW for additional services is an issue for them in areas other than tethering.



Are there not Google Voice and other apps that do the same thing? There are apps that let you have a basic low minute plan, but use the data plan for essentially unlimited phone calls. So the precident is there to have to allow people to use third party apps that circumvent VZW's paid services.



I know several people personally, that have the cheapest minute plans and use thousands of "minutes" per month over their data plan. They may not be using all of their 450 minutes that they paid for, but they are getting thousands of minutes of calling each month that they are NOT paying for. So people are getting the use of a high minute plan while only paying for the lowest plan. How is that different than tethering, where I get to tether for free on a data plan that I paid for that I don't use all my alloted bandwidth on? And I don't mean what the difference is in semantics, what is the difference really, in the real world? I am getting something that I am "not paying for" according to VZW's definitions....

Considering voip services use on average 64kbps which is 8KBps. This means you use about half a meg for one minute on the phone. You could use 10,000 minutes of voip and only consume 5gb of data. This is what net neutrality is preventing ISPs from blocking. Competing services.

Tethering users typically use MUCH more data than that. VOIP is not a bandwidth hog. Tethering is.

Sent from my brain using human to phone transport technology.

 

[SquireSCA]

Considering voip services use on average 64kbps which is 8KBps. This means you use about half a meg for one minute on the phone. You could use 10,000 minutes of voip and only consume 5gb of data. This is what net neutrality is preventing ISPs from blocking. Competing services.

Tethering users typically use MUCH more data than that. VOIP is not a bandwidth hog. Tethering is.

Sent from my brain using human to phone transport technology.

And my only counter to that point is that not all tethering is a bandwidth hog. Go after the ones that use too much bandwidth, regardless of what vehicle they used to do it. But the people that use tiny amounts, like the VoIP does, shouldn't be in the crosshairs.

I know people that stream Netflix to their phone and then plug the phone into the HDMI port on their tv. That uses tons of bandwidth and isn't tethering. How is that any different? They use the phone's data channel to stream video to be used on another device.

So if I can use the standard data plan to pull down data from the phone and use that data on my TV, why is that different than pulling down the same Netflix or data and watching it on my laptop?

Both are "separate devices" and "getting the data from the phone"... So should VZW charge us $20 a month if we stream Netflix to the TV rather than just to the phone's screen?

 

[ABQNM]

I think that if we "used it a lot", most of us would pay for it. It's the occasional usage and the fact that I am typically under 1gb a month on an unlimited plan, and that usage includes the occasional tethering, that I don't feel like paying an extra $240 a year for.

If I tethered a lot, they would see that excess bandwidth and simply charge me for going over, or bump me up to the next teir and I would not argue with them.

I have never argued that unlimited means that I should have as much bandwidth as I want. I have only argued that if I pay for unlimited(5GB), and only use 20% or less of that each month, I don't want to pay twice because 2% of that 20% was on my laptop...

I understand and wish it worked that way, but unfortunately the blanket policy is cheaper to implement and if they opened that door everyone would try to walk through it regardless of whether or not they used it just occasionally. Sometimes companies have to make tough decisions that may negatively impact a small percentage of users to protect the rest.

Sent from my brain using human to phone transport technology.

 

[czerdrill]

How so? They all require you to have a data plan from VZW. So does free tethering.

I don't understand this question. My point was whether you use Skype to call someone for 5 minutes doesn't affect them. You're still paying them at the end of the month for minutes that you are not using. With tethering you are using FAR more data then you would ever use using Skype (not you personally but the point is the possibility exists). Like I said, if you cannot understand the difference between the two, the discussion should end.

Correct, it costs them nothing, until people start dropping their $20 unlimited text plans and use the free texting apps on the data plan that they are already paying for, or for all the people that pay a per-text plan, when VZW sees the revenue from that drop 20% in a year and trending downward, they take notice.

Not going to happen. These people who you think are going to all drop their texting plans don't exist. Like I said, the whining has been going on for years. You're not going to suddenly have educated consumers who all drop their texting plan and stand up against Verizon. Wishful (albeit ridiculous) thinking.

The mere fact that they are going to start doing that, says that the free apps are cutting into their profits and they are going to have to start forcing people to pay for services that they obviously don't want or need in order to keep raking in the cash. So is it possible that your first comment about not pulling one over on them is inaccurate? Obviously, free apps using existing data plans that allow one to not have to pay VZW for additional services is an issue for them in areas other than tethering.

The mere fact that they haven't done it and haven't even discussed doing it proves you wrong. What I said was what they could do. As of today, VZW has never said they would, or plan to do such a thing. Like I said, people are not going to drop texting.

Are there not Google Voice and other apps that do the same thing? There are apps that let you have a basic low minute plan, but use the data plan for essentially unlimited phone calls. So the precident is there to have to allow people to use third party apps that circumvent VZW's paid services.

The amount of people who actually try to circumvent these things are moot compared to those who don't. It's nice that you think that all mobile users are these smart, savvy customers who are in the know about such things, but the truth is they're not.

I know several people personally, that have the cheapest minute plans and use thousands of "minutes" per month over their data plan. They may not be using all of their 450 minutes that they paid for, but they are getting thousands of minutes of calling each month that they are NOT paying for. So people are getting the use of a high minute plan while only paying for the lowest plan. How is that different than tethering, where I get to tether for free on a data plan that I paid for that I don't use all my alloted bandwidth on? And I don't mean what the difference is in semantics, what is the difference really, in the real world? I am getting something that I am "not paying for" according to VZW's definitions....

Yes, and I know "several" people who like the iPhone better so it must have better market share then Android. See what I did there? The "several" people that you and I know are not the norm, or the majority. They are anomalies, based on what the actual market actually shows. Yes, it's fun to think that the 10 people you know who go over their minutes every month are indicative of everyone on VZWs network but its not the case, sorry. People are not paying $600/month in minute overages to Verizon and pleading for some way to save themselves from this wretched company. The dramatics sound nice, but its not the case. Most people (read the overwhelming majority) are happy with VZW's plans, their services and their support. The few whiners are definitely the most vocal, but they're not anywhere remotely close to being the norm.

 

[ABQNM]

And my only counter to that point is that not all tethering is a bandwidth hog. Go after the ones that use too much bandwidth, regardless of what vehicle they used to do it. But the people that use tiny amounts, like the VoIP does, shouldn't be in the crosshairs.

I know people that stream Netflix to their phone and then plug the phone into the HDMI port on their tv. That uses tons of bandwidth and isn't tethering. How is that any different? They use the phone's data channel to stream video to be used on another device.

So if I can use the standard data plan to pull down data from the phone and use that data on my TV, why is that different than pulling down the same Netflix or data and watching it on my laptop?

Both are "separate devices" and "getting the data from the phone"... So should VZW charge us $20 a month if we stream Netflix to the TV rather than just to the phone's screen?

Netflix for mobile does not use near the bandwidth of the PC or other delivery methods. On average a 1 hour tv show uses less than 200mb on mobile while it uses 1-3gb on PC depending on HD or not. Mobile usage is compressed much more. That is why the switch to non-unlimited plans and the ability to throttle users of necessary. And the users that are at risk of being throttled are usually the ones tethering without a plan.

Bottom line is there is only so much pie and we all need to share it so it is necessary no matter how much we dislike it to have portion control.

As for the unlimited part - I feel that if it is on the mobile they should hold true to the name and let us use as much as we need. I don't feel that just because we have an unlimited plan it also entitles us to unlimited tethering.

Sent from my brain using human to phone transport technology.

 

[czerdrill]

And my only counter to that point is that not all tethering is a bandwidth hog. Go after the ones that use too much bandwidth, regardless of what vehicle they used to do it. But the people that use tiny amounts, like the VoIP does, shouldn't be in the crosshairs.

I know people that stream Netflix to their phone and then plug the phone into the HDMI port on their tv. That uses tons of bandwidth and isn't tethering. How is that any different? They use the phone's data channel to stream video to be used on another device.

So if I can use the standard data plan to pull down data from the phone and use that data on my TV, why is that different than pulling down the same Netflix or data and watching it on my laptop?

Both are "separate devices" and "getting the data from the phone"... So should VZW charge us $20 a month if we stream Netflix to the TV rather than just to the phone's screen?

They are doing that. You still have failed to provide a link where VZW said they're going after tether-ers. They're not. They're going after the people who are in the top 5% of usage on their network every month. The fact that most of those people might be tether-ers is irrelevant. They're going after everyone. You're trying to make VZW out to be some company that's lying and stealing from their customers and then making up excuses, when the fact is they are doing EXACTLY what you propose they do.